No fee unless we recover compensation for your family Text size 833-4-ASBESTOS (833-427-2378) Free Case Review

Search

7 results for “Reaction Department”

  1. Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · August 28, 1996 · in the opinion

    Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Garrett (1996)

    …effect. That OCF had direct knowledge of the hazardous nature of asbestos was evident in 1941, when one of the lawyers in its Legal and Patent Department, having received a letter from a Saranac Doctor, expressed…

  2. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · June 5, 1995 · in the opinion

    Ripa v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas (1995)

    …Vorwald to Hazard suggesting that Kaylo produced an asbestosis-like reaction in the lungs and that "every precaution should be taken to minimize exposure of industrial employees." (9) The final confidential January 1952 project report concluding…

  3. Court case · Florida Supreme Court · August 26, 1999 · in the opinion

    Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Ballard (1999)

    …liable for punitive damages.\[1\] During the punitive damages portion of the trial, Ballard presented evidence as to the company's financial position and reaction concerning the asbestos litigation. The evidence included a 1996 Fact Sheet…

  4. Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 1992 · in the opinion

    Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Watson (1992)

    …After reviewing these options, the memorandum states: If \[the union's\] reaction is unfavorable, the way is opened to spread word among the locals about the refusal of the Union officials to make \[insurance protection and…

  5. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · April 14, 1999 · in the opinion

    Coward v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1999)

    …supra 671 A.2d at 1155 (reasoning that plaintiff injured by adverse reaction to prescription drug could not demonstrate causal connection between injury and manufacturer's allegedly deficient warning because plaintiff's treating physician testified that…

  6. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · June 5, 1995 · in the opinion

    Schiavo v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas (1995)

    …any error, as opposed to the jurors' normal reaction to a graphic exposure to the effects of advanced mesothelioma. While there is no New Jersey case specifically authorizing a "day in the life" tape, such tapes…

  7. Court case · California Supreme Court · August 18, 1997 · in the opinion

    Buttram v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1997)

    …or inhalation of asbestos fibers, because many who are exposed will never suffer a compensable injury. Neither would a nondetrimental physiological reaction to asbestos exposure constitute accrual. On the other hand, under this definition a cause…